I am confused - would having access to this other sub forum spread the message further? And what is the message? Come now, be clear: is Neil for or against bolts? Is macca for or against bolts? Or maybe they both climb trad and they both climb bolts- no that can't be right. So what is it? The people have a right to know!

On 8/03/2013 ratherbeclimbinV9 wrote:>Ok, so I've pretty much had my fun for the evening. Less tongue-in-cheek>- I see where you're coming from Eduardo, though I think 'moderator' and>'SCA owner/operator' are two different roles, though both involving a degree>of altruistic work on behalf of others.

@ e s - Thanks, that is a fair appraisal of the situation . . .
@rbdv9 - see above post - If Niel is 'owner/operator' of SCA then why is it being portrayed as an 'organisation' rather then as Niels Australian CliffsPty Ltd.

And in regards to the SCA subforum, it is served from this site as far as I can tell and there is nothing to indicate that he has any 'ownership' here - neither niel or the SCA is listed as a sponsor of this site and the SCA is portrayed as an 'organisation' which implies that he does not 'own' it either. He merely acts as a 'moderator' of the subforum on behalf of the organisations members. If he is 'owner/operator' of something parading as an 'organisation' then there is absolutely nothing 'altruistic' about it whatsoever, as it is 'self-serving' rather then 'selfless' action . . .

Clearly u miss my point- we are a very small community and should try and get along a bit better. We are climbers first before some subset and at some point most of us try the various forms of the sport. We each find a similar thing from the sport and it should not be for someone else to say what I feel whether I am clipping bolts, placing an RP, or hanging off a hook- all of which I do.

I am sure macca can put his point of view over on chocky just as well and maybe to a broader audience. So chill man u are wound up way too tight

Dalai wrote:>Personally I find this a little sad. The whole idea of the login to Safer Cliffs was to restrict it to known >people and not restricting users on the basis of differing opinions or clashing egos...

>I don't always agree with what Macciza says, but not having his and other peoples opinions included >in that area of the forum is wrong IMO.

I was also banned from safer cliffs,and chockstone on several occasions due to differing opinions
With Neil Monteith infact once he banned me because he thought I'd said something that implicated him with the dangerousness bolting that led to a climbers death.
The situation was that someone wanted more facts on the situation and I made the comment that to get clarification he should contact Neil Monteith, bam! Banned from the site, that particular action by Neil was so unjustified that the site owner mike put me back on with an apology for Neil's actions.
He can be Napolionic in his management but that simply highlights his inappropriate use of power.
I believe the first and most important quality of a moderator is to be bipartisan, his personal take or involvement often precludes his ability to see things clearly, and he abuses his privilege as a result.

On 10/03/2013 Muki wrote:>By the way Macca still banned and, and couldn't give a shit

Well at least I know I am in good company, I was getting worried it may be just me . . .
I am similarly trying to find out what the actual site owner knows about it all, as I am receiving basically no response from Niel, which is others have noted is really unacceptable.

I only give a shit because i feel have a valid opinion in the are discussed and that a voice of restraint against profligate bolting is needed. If he ends up banning anyone who has a different point of view then it is bad for climbing in general and it becomes nothing more then a self-serving 'young mans club'. And before we know it they will retro- bolting trad projects into pleasure climbs. . . .

On 18/03/2013 Macciza wrote:>In the interest of SafeCliffs, could someone send me the recent topics>from the SaferCliffs discussions - purely for personal research of course>. . .
In latest riveting developments in the Safer Cliffs forum, Superstu trad-climbs a chimney at Nowra.

You've given me an idea Kieran, since Macca isn't allowed in the private Safer Squirrel Forum maybe we need a public thread for him. Except we can't say the B-word in public (the media might be reading it and plus it upsets the trad heads) so whenever you need to mention the b-word you just substitute another word, lets say "Kieran".

For example, "on Sunday I climbed up a chimney and came across two opposing Kierans at the top, one each side of the chimney. As I abseiled off them I wondered about the physics and whether the Kierans were getting an outwards force, and whether this is a problem with glued-in Kierans."

On 18/03/2013 Superstu wrote:>You've given me an idea Kieran, since Macca isn't allowed in the Secret>Squirrel Thread maybe we need a public thread for him. Except we can't>say the B-word in public (in case land managers or the media get wind of>our adventures in stainless) so whenever you need to mention the b-word>you just substitute another word, lets say "Kieran".>
It's amazing how these random word selection thingies work.

'I went to repeat Shai Hulud over the weekend and someone had covered the wall in poodles. It was disgusting. One of the poodles was not even glued in correctly and kept falling out of the hole. upon further searching I found a poodle kit under a rock, complete with a poodle drill, poodle plates a few ring poodles and poodle glue. Fortunately I found the perpetrator and proceeded to shove a couple of poodles where the sun don't shine. I am now going to proceed to de-poodle the world with the anti-poodle folk collective. Random retro-Poodlers beware, we are coming for your poodles.'

I do think banning people is the wrong thing, especially from a private forum. Sure people in high places do read some forums, and not discussing some things publicly can be a good idea. However if its private, let them speak. If it is nonsense poppy-c--k it can as easily be ignored as you seem to be already doing Neil. I get frustrated by red-herring's as much as the next guy, but banning involvement seems to discredit most organisations.

My experience with rebolting routes is that many people bicker and banter on a forum, while those that can go out and get the job done. Thanks to the re-bolters out there among us, love your work!!

On 18/03/2013 Superstu wrote:>You've given me an idea Kieran, since Macca isn't allowed in the private>Safer Squirrel Thread maybe we need a public thread for him. Except we>can't say the B-word in public (the media might be reading it and plus>it upsets the trad heads) so whenever you need to mention the b-word you>just substitute another word, lets say "Kieran".>>For example, "on Sunday I climbed up a chimney and came across two opposing>Kierans, one each side of the chimney. As I abseiled off I wondered about>the physics and whether the Kierans were getting an outwards force or a>45 degree out and down force, and whether this is a problem with glued-in>Kierans."

On 18/03/2013 pecheur wrote:>Surely they should be Joes or Godings ...

Or Montys?

But seriously, poodling of Sheep Halal would probably be a good idea in terms of Safer Squirelling as it would allow kittens to experience the danger of ferreting in complete safety . . . It may also assist in keeping bits of the cliff on the cliff . . .

But lets say I wanted to actually de-frock a poodle - whats the current 'best practice'?

Hey Neil... I think you do a grand service for climbing safety... nothing wrong with replacing manky bolts... I know you have replaced plenty of mine (and Matty Brooks!!) and I sleep better for it. Don't see the fuss, replacing manky in-situ gear is obviously making those placements safer to use. Don't add new bolts and there is no reason for fuss. Doesn't make the routes 'safe'... only climbers exercising due care and attention can do that, but it makes the placements less likely to fail and I see that as a good thing. The rest of this discussion is largely bollocks and irrelevant... :)